Wednesday, March 10, 2010

And Yet Another Blog I Own


I was “Ostroyed”. That’s when a blogger deletes your post and claims you said something “nasty” when in reality it was something they could not debunk

by Larry Simons
March 10, 2010

The newest member of the “Blogs I Own” club is, without a doubt, the most cowardly, because it is the only blog in the club that withholds his name and photo. Other members of the Blogs I Own club are: Crooks and Liars, Dave Neiwert’s Orincus, Andy Ostroy’s The Ostroy Report, Dave Willis’ Watcha Talkin’ Bout Willis? and Prison Planet. Add to that The Last Name Left, a liberal douchebag from London, England who I have repeatedly debunked on 9-11, global warming, and every other issue we debate.

Yesterday I was “Ostroyed” by TLNL. The term “Ostroyed” comes from my debates with liberal blogger Andy Ostroy last year when I posted comments on his blog, only to have them deleted the next day and being told by Ostroy my comments were deleted because they were "nasty” and I “violated his rules”. In reality, my posts would contain irrefutable questions and remarks. Ostroy, in his panic [because he couldn’t have his readers witness the fact that I posted a comment or question Ostroy could not debunk] would delete my posts, claiming I made a “nasty” or “profane” comment, or that I violated his or blogger.com’s rules.

Instead of leaving my comment posted [which would have exposed my “nasty” comment and been the evidence blogger.com needed to delete my account, as well as made me a target of ridicule and scorn of his readers if what I said was really nasty], Ostroy protected me and removed the comment [something that made no sense if he was threatening to report me to blogger.com]. Oh, and by the way, I never violated any blogger.com rules.

Hence the term “Ostroyed” was born. Ostroyed: Having your comment deleted from a blog when the blogs owner claims you were “off topic”, “nasty” or you violated rules, when in reality, it was because the comment contained something the owner could not debunk or wanted to confront.

Below is a screen shot of TLNL asking me two questions. I clearly answer his questions. He deletes my comment and says I brought up an “irrelevant point”. He CLEARLY deleted my post because I asked him, “How does being RIGHT-wing make people go on shooting sprees?” He had no answer, so it was DELETE time for The Last Dick Left.

Notice the time under each photo showing 08:16 on March 9, before AND after the deletion.
(click to enlarge)




TLNL…….PWNED!

26 comments:

the_last_name_left said...

you are repeatedly deleted because you talk such complete rubbish, you are constantly foul-mouthed and viciously insulting, you're dishonest, incapable of nuance, etc etc etc.

Here's a sample of Larry's style, culled from just a few weeks of his posts at my blog over last Summer.

http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2009/08/larry-architect-tourettes.html

Why should anyone put up with that, Larry?

the_last_name_left said...

L: In reality, my posts would contain irrefutable questions and remarks.

What's an irrefutable question?

Having your comment deleted from a blog when the blogs owner claims you were “off topic”, “nasty” or you violated rules, when in reality, it was because the comment contained something the owner could not debunk nor wanted to confront.

There isn't a single thing you can say to me that "scares" me Larry - there is nothing you have which I "refuse to confront". Well, apart from your obvious problems.

-----

You are also distorting the facts here Larry - I direct anyone who is interested (no-one) to the following comment by larry:

http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2010/03/david-dees-is-holocaust-denier.html?showComment=1268018254201#c8662280934292112218

See if you can spot where Larry answers my two questions?

He doesn't. But Larry omits this fact from his post here.........because his argument is so strong, obviously.

You're a fool, Larry.

Larry said...

" there is nothing you have which I "refuse to confront". Well, apart from your obvious problems."

REALLLLLLY? So you didnt say THIS about my Mark Potok story the other day on your blog?

"try addressing the topic, Larry?

Forget your article on Potok - I don't care about it."

THAT was REFUSING to confront my story.

Once AGAIN....PWNED.

An "irrefutable question" is a question in which the content in the question cannot be refuted. Its even used on this website. So, yes, it's valid terminology.

http://www.bible.ca/catholic-questions.htm

"you are repeatedly deleted because you talk such complete rubbish, you are constantly foul-mouthed and viciously insulting, you're dishonest"

But yet, as my post shows, I was none of the above things you mentioned. Did I call you asshole? Yes, but not to name-call, but because you ARE being an asshole when you delete my post claiming I didnt answer your question when I clearly DID. Calling you "asshole" for that is no more name calling than calling someone a rapist after they raped someone.

Would you like for me to compile a list of your very own rules that YOU have broken? [How many times have you called me a "cunt"?] In the screen shot on THIS post you called me a "fucking moron" because I ANSWERED your questions! LOL

I find it hilarious that the whole point of my story was that I was "Ostroyed" by you [deleting a post when the blog owner claims the post was nasty, vile or off topic] and in this comment thread you simply just repeat your defense of deleting comments for the very reason of "being foul-mouthed, off topic, insulting and dishonest". How ironic that the very screen shot of me answering your questions DISPROVES that I violated any of the things you list, but youre also defending "Ostroying" me, which is the entire point of my post!

I dont know whether to thank you or get you a straight jacket. The funny thing is about all this, is that you STILL have not answered my question---this one:

“How does being RIGHT-wing make people go on shooting sprees?”

By the way, good job IGNORING my post under the Pentagon shooter story. Couldnt debunk one word of it, huh?? LOL

the_last_name_left said...

Oh - so because you found some obscure website using the phrase "irrefutable questions" then it's perfectly sensible?

A question is defined as something like

---- An expression of inquiry that invites or calls for a reply.

irrefutable however, is defined something like this:

"Impossible to refute or disprove; incontrovertible: irrefutable arguments; irrefutable evidence of guilt."

How can a question - an enquiry - be "impossible to refute"? If you are making a statement - or a claim - then you aren't actually asking a question.

L: you ARE being an asshole when you delete my post claiming I didnt answer your question when I clearly DID.

No - you lamely answered one of my two questions, and it took you 6 further goes before you began to address the second. Even then, your reply only proved your original reasons for raising the issue (which I was responding to) was vacuous and only intended as silly sophistry.

ie You can't address the point that right wing anti-government types are attacking the government.......your example of an Obama-supporting killer doesn't hold because she didn't go out killing people demonised by Obama and the left. But then, the left don't "demonise" in that way - you and your lunatic, violent friends do. And that's the entire point - which you try hard to miss.

L: Calling you "asshole" for that is no more name calling than calling someone a rapist after they raped someone.

wow, what a nice line in rhetoric you have.

the very screen shot of me answering your questions DISPROVES that I violated any of the things you list,

How can your screenshot prove you failed to violate "any" of my rules? What are my rules? FUCK OFF WANKERS? Well, I even put up with you, so I ain't that strict - even with obvious wankers.

“How does being RIGHT-wing make people go on shooting sprees?”

No - you're mistaken. It isn't simply being "right-wing" that makes people go on "shooting sprees".

Look at the targets of the violence, Larry?

----

Seems you want to protect all these nutters Larry - and you obviously wish to disassociate your own views from the actions of your fellow travellers.

Thing is, if you're honest, you understand as well as anyone why these nutters are picking the targets they are - and why they're resorting to such extreme action.

Isn't that right, Larry?

the_last_name_left said...

Question:

do the people whom have demonised, attacked and killed abortion-practicing doctors support abortion or not?

Do animal welfarists whom have threatened the lives of biologists believe in animal welfare and rights or not?

Do right wing, anti-semitic, anti-government, paranoid conspiracists believe in anti-semitism, FEMA camps, debt dollars, the NWO, genocide, "the hollow-cost" etc?

Of course they do.

And look at the targets of the violence.

IF you think the government is corrupt and is out to kill you and destroy everything you believe in........then what are you going to do?

It isn't difficult to guess.

the_last_name_left said...

You jump about accusing people of being "like Goebbels".

Yet in threads denouncing holocaust denial you refuse to recognise the crimes of Goebbels (and Nazism)

You use Nazism and fascism as an insult - but fail to denounce the thing itself. Can't fall much lower than that in my eyes, Larry, as you should know.

Larry said...

" so I ain't that strict - even with obvious wankers."

Ain't?? That's a word?

"How can your screenshot prove you failed to violate "any" of my rules?"

Uhhhhh, by simply READING it.

"No - you're mistaken. It isn't simply being "right-wing" that makes people go on "shooting sprees".

Look at the targets of the violence, Larry?"

Yeah, the targets are INNOCENT people and yet you claim that they kill these people IN RESPONSE to them being angry over 3,000 INNOCENT people killed on 9-11, which, as I have already stated, makes as much sense as an anti-abortion person killing an abortionist. Do you conveniently miss when I say that?

"Seems you want to protect all these nutters Larry - and you obviously wish to disassociate your own views from the actions of your fellow travellers."

LOL, I PROTECT them? How? By calling their deeds atrocities? Because I simply ask 'what's the connection?' [that you have YET to provide] I am "protecting" them?

You JUST DENIED that being RIGHT WING makes people shoot others and then you say this:

"Do right wing, anti-semitic, anti-government, paranoid conspiracists believe in anti-semitism, FEMA camps, debt dollars, the NWO, genocide, "the hollow-cost" etc?"

THEN YOU BLAME IT ON RIGHT-WING PEOPLE! I really think you need a straight jacket and a rubber room.

So, LEFT wing people arent anti-semitic? {I would call HITLER LEFT wing, wouldnt you?] LEFT wing people arent anti-government? [Bill Maher, Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, John F. Kennedy] LEFT wing people dont hold conspiratorial views? [the ''9-11 is an inside job' view is a FAR-LEFT view!]

Joe Stack was a DEMOCRAT. Can we blame the Democrats and left wingers for him flying a plane into the IRS building?

I said all this on the other thread [the Pentagon shooter thread] but you CONVENIENTLY IGNORE IT.

Real Truth Online said...

"Yet in threads denouncing holocaust denial you refuse to recognise the crimes of Goebbels (and Nazism)"

When have I outwardly said I did NOT believe 6 million died? Show me the link to that, Im dying to see where I said that. Asking QUESTIONS is NOT denial-----BUT, on the other hand, when you ADMIT you cannot verify ALL 6 million names that died and THEN you say "denying ONE death is holocaust denial", that actually makes YOU a holocaust denier!

YOU also think false flag terrorism is unimportant or doesnt exist at all when Hitler himself had his OWN Reichstag building bombed and blamed it on the communists so he could invade Poland and thus his assault on 6 million Jews. But thats "unimportant" right?

the_last_name_left said...

Me: "How can your screenshot prove you failed to violate "any" of my rules?"

You: Uhhhhh, by simply READING it.


So what are all my rules? You must know all my rules if you claim a single instance fails to violate any of them.

WHAT ARE THESE RULES OF MINE WHICH YOU FAILED TO VIOLATE? How do you know what they are?

I don't actually have any. I just find people who think as you do, and behave as you do, to be of negative consequence. I'm happy to be challenged - but let's have some weight to it, not this piffle and holocaust denial?

the_last_name_left said...

L: When have I outwardly said I did NOT believe 6 million died?

what are your grounds for believing circa 6 million jews were exterminated in the Nazi Holocaust?

Larry said...

"what are your grounds for believing circa 6 million jews were exterminated in the Nazi Holocaust?"

What I've been spoonfed by history books and hollywood movies. I admit it, on this particular topic I'm a sheeple. I've accepted the received reality [the official story], but since 9-11, I have began to question official stories, that's why I have given David Dees the benefit of the doubt, because I simply dont know enough about this particular topic to have any rock solid stance on it.

That's why I listened to you AND him, and just from what was said alone between the two of you [NOT what I had learned before---but just what YOU TWO SAID] Dees' side had more credibility than yours.

"So what are all my rules? You must know all my rules if you claim a single instance fails to violate any of them."

Are you retarded? I mean...REALLY...are you? You STATED you rules in a previous post!! Your rules are:

people who speak "complete rubbish....constantly foul-mouthed ...viciously insulting, ....dishonest, incapable of nuance....

You have a VERY SHORT memory----or SELECTIVE one.

"I'm happy to be challenged"

Hilarious! Is that why you "dont care" about the Mark Potok story I did---because you LIKE to be challenged?

Is that why you keep IGNORING the fact that Joe Stack was a DEMOCRAT?

Is that why you keep ignoring my response to your post under the Pentagon shooter story??

Is that why you keep ignoring why you IGNORE the fact that you think false flag attacks arent important yet Hitler killed 6 million people BECAUSE of one?

Is THAT why you IGNORED most of my post at 4:21??

Is that why you IGNORED the fact that you said right wing people go on shooting sprees, then when I asked you 'how being RIGHT wing' makes people go on shooting sprees, you DENIED saying only right wing people go on shooting sprees, then in your very next sentence said:

"Do right wing, anti-semitic, anti-government, paranoid conspiracists believe in anti-semitism, FEMA camps, debt dollars, the NWO, genocide, "the hollow-cost" etc?"?????

Happy to be challenged huh?????

HILARIOUS!!!!

Larry said...

It must be great being able to come to a blog, express ALL your views and NOT be deleted---AND to be able to get ALL your questions answered.

I wish I knew what that felt like.

the_last_name_left said...

L: Dees' side had more credibility than yours.

You mean Holocaust denial has more "credibility" than "my side".

(My side being an effort at stating the KNOWN FACTS - the Holocaust of circa 6million jews under Nazism.)

SO WHY DO YOU SAY YOU ARE NOT A HOLOCAUST DENIER?

This is exactly the sort of sophistry I accuse you of. You're not a holocaust denier but you don't believe the evidence for the holocaust and you don't believe the holocaust was real.

That's holocaust denial, Larry. You're welcome to it - but at least be honest about it.

the_last_name_left said...

you're perfectly welcome to post at my blog larry - but not if it is senseless, not if it is simply rude and obnoxious with zero content, and not if it is simply parroting nazi bullshit.

I am anti-nazi, Larry. There's no reason I have to give nazis a platform and I won't. It isn't like you don't have your own blog to promote holocaust denial and nazism is it? That'll change as soon as nazism gets a hold, of course - though you'll never realise it until it's too late, of course.

Larry said...

Jesus Christ, you CANNOT read. I said because I have not taken a rock solid stance on it either way. YOU are the holocaust denier by saying you cannot verify all 6 million names. Didnt you say "Denying ONE death is holocaust denial?" YES, YOU DID.

"you're perfectly welcome to post at my blog larry - but not if it is senseless, not if it is simply rude and obnoxious with zero content, and not if it is simply parroting nazi bullshit."

Translation: If you dont say anything I cant debunk or dont want to confront. The screen shot of the post you DELETED in my story had NONE of your aforementioned things. It was NOT:

1. rude
2. senseless
3. obnoxious
4. lacking zero content
5. filled with nazi bullshit

My post had NONE of the above, and it was STILL deleted.

"I am anti-nazi, Larry"

That's why you delete posts like Joseph Goebbels would? He must be proud of you!

By the way, LOVE how you ONCE AGAIN ignored 90% of my post.

So, I will REPEAT:

"I'm happy to be challenged"

Hilarious! Is that why you "dont care" about the Mark Potok story I did---because you LIKE to be challenged?

Is that why you keep IGNORING the fact that Joe Stack was a DEMOCRAT?

Is that why you keep ignoring my response to your post under the Pentagon shooter story??

Is that why you keep ignoring why you IGNORE the fact that you think false flag attacks arent important yet Hitler killed 6 million people BECAUSE of one?

Is THAT why you IGNORED most of my post at 4:21??

Is that why you IGNORED the fact that you said right wing people go on shooting sprees, then when I asked you 'how being RIGHT wing' makes people go on shooting sprees, you DENIED saying only right wing people go on shooting sprees, then in your very next sentence said:

"Do right wing, anti-semitic, anti-government, paranoid conspiracists believe in anti-semitism, FEMA camps, debt dollars, the NWO, genocide, "the hollow-cost" etc?"?????

Happy to be challenged huh?????

HILARIOUS!!!!

the_last_name_left said...

See, here's your sophistry and duplicity:

On the Holocaust you claim to be "agnostic":

L: I said because I have not taken a rock solid stance on it either way

How come you don't take that position on 911 being "an inside job"?

What's the difference?

Your position is nonsensical, as the evidence for the holocaust (and nazi crimes) is enormous, comes from many different sources, and all centers around the inescapable conclusion that the holocaust was real, and exterminated c.6 million jews (plus others)

At the same time as proving the holocaust, it proves Nazi crimes. Obviously.

But you don't accept this.

Whereas on 911 being an inside job there is absolutely zero positive evidence. Yet you believe it! And you believe it proves the criminality of Bushco.

Larry said...

Love how you IGNORED just about everything I said. Why is 9-11 more important? Because that has been used as the catalyst for the acceleration of removed civil liberties, endless war, increased war budgets, war crimes like torture and their excuse for labeling anyone they want to "terrorists". The holocaust was 60 years ago, that's over.

Now, respond to my fucking posts you prick. Im sick and tired of you IGNORING what I say but answer every goddamned thing you ask.

Real Truth Online said...

"I'm happy to be challenged"

Hilarious! Is that why you "dont care" about the Mark Potok story I did---because you LIKE to be challenged?

Is that why you keep IGNORING the fact that Joe Stack was a DEMOCRAT?

Is that why you keep ignoring my response to your post under the Pentagon shooter story??

Is that why you keep ignoring why you IGNORE the fact that you think false flag attacks arent important yet Hitler killed 6 million people BECAUSE of one?

Is THAT why you IGNORED most of my post at 4:21??

Is that why you IGNORED the fact that you said right wing people go on shooting sprees, then when I asked you 'how being RIGHT wing' makes people go on shooting sprees, you DENIED saying only right wing people go on shooting sprees, then in your very next sentence said:

"Do right wing, anti-semitic, anti-government, paranoid conspiracists believe in anti-semitism, FEMA camps, debt dollars, the NWO, genocide, "the hollow-cost" etc?"?????

Happy to be challenged huh?????

the_last_name_left said...

Is THAT why you IGNORED most of my post at 4:21??
----------

No - I ignore most of what you say because you're so evidently a twit.

Larry said...

Ahhhhh, but a "twit" you cant debunk!

the_last_name_left said...

hmmm....I think I can. :D

Larry said...

Well.....Im WAITING! Mark Potok story? Listing ONE building that has suffered universal collapse from just fires and small damage alone?? Joe Stack was a Democrat. How is hating the government a RIGHT wing ideology??? Do you drive a car and use light bulbs? Jesus, the list of things youve IGNORED is ENDLESS!! Oh but thats right......you THINK you can.....LOL

Im waiting.

the_last_name_left said...

You're waiting?!!!!

I have been waiting 9 months for you to answer whether you an architect or not.

And for the HOW WHO WHAT WHEN of your controlled demolition idea.

And an answer as to how the explosives didn't go off in the fires.....how they survived the plane crash and explosions....

9 months we're been waiting for you to answer these questions, Larry.

Do you want to explain why I should respond to your questions of today when you refuse to anwer my questions for 9 months?

9 months? and waiting. And you still can't bring yourself to answer it.

Yet I'm to answer your daily demands? lol

Larry said...

Ahhh, but yet you claim you are "HAPPY to be challenged"-----EXCEPT when the challenge is answering my questions and refuting me. You dont refute anything I say, not one word of the Mark Potok story. You claim you "dont care about it" yet you did a story on your blog about right-wing extremism and the SPLC. You say NOTHING about Joe Stack being a Democrat, NOTHING about you contributing to the very global warming that you say is happening---on and on and on.

HAPPY to be challenged???

HA!!!

the_last_name_left said...

So you're not answering then?

Anonymous said...

Gilad Atzmon (a Jew) argues that truth and truth seeking are alien to Jewish collective ideology and identity politics and that, therefore, we need to redouble our commitment to rigorous and unconditional historical research.
Truth, history and integrity

interesting read :)